9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (7) TMI 281X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ERVICE TAX, DELHI-III, NEW DELHI VERSUS M/S. BHARUCH DAHEJ RAILWAY COMPANY LTD., M/S. KRISHNAPATNAM RAILWAY COMPANY LTD. [ 2019 (4) TMI 26 - CESTAT NEW DELHI ] is under active consideration of the Revenue. Mr.Dwivedi on instructions states that if an adjournment of four weeks is given, he will be in a position to inform the court whether the order dated 25th March, 2019 of the Tribunal in respect ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r the Act to challenge the impugned order dated 21st December, 2016 before the Customs, Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal (Tribunal). Therefore, prima facie, we are not inclined to interfere with the impugned order dated 21st December, 2016 in our writ jurisdiction. 3. In response, Mr.Nankani, learned Senior Counsel appearing in support of the petition points out that other Railway Corpora ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t. We informed him that if the activity carried out by the petitioner is identical to M/s. Bharuch Dahej Railway Co. Ltd. and the Revenue has accepted the order dated 25th January, 2016, then there is no reason to treat the petitioner differently. 5. At this, Mr. Dwivedi, learned Counsel appearing in support seeks four weeks time to take instructions and to file an affidavit, if necessary. 6. Stan ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ide. This on the premise that persons similarly situated be treated equally is fundamental requirement of Rule of law. 4. At this, we asked learned counsel appearing for the Revenue whether the order of the Tribunal dated 25th March, 2019 has been challenged by the Revenue before a higher forum. 5. Mr.Dwivedi, learned counsel for the Revenue states that the challenge to order of the Tribunal dated ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
